dana a hypocrit?

Honestly i dont really care..I mean the UFC isn't going to be dismantled without Randy or Cro Cop..Im sure theres many other guys that would love the chance to fight in the UFC.I dont know enough about contracts or care to know about them.I just want to see fights.It's hard to know every single detail of a contract or how it works and what goes on behind the scenes..I cant say Dana is always right and the fighters are always wrong or vice versa...As long as the UFC puts out quality cards every month im happy.

Quite a few are talking about it acctually. I personally think this is BS, in sports with unions the team has to pay the player if they cut them.

A perfect example is the NHL...

In the NHL, if a player gets injured during a game or practice, the team pays them for games missed.

If a player is not playing to their potential, the get sent down, but still earn their contract rates. when a player is placed on waivers by a team, it allows other teams to claim that player and assume his contract. There is a provision called "right of recall" which allows that team who initially put the player on waivers to recall the player. If there is no right of recall and no team claims the player, the player is now able to be demoted to the farm system team of the parent team and paid the minor league salary.

If a player has a no trade clause in their contract, the team cannot just ignore that and trade them.

I am probably missing something, but these three points are pretty strong.

These are some things the UFC should take into consideration to make their contracts a little more fighter friendly.

Honestly i dont really care..I mean the UFC isn't going to be dismantled without Randy or Cro Cop..Im sure theres many other guys that would love the chance to fight in the UFC.I dont know enough about contracts or care to know about them.I just want to see fights.It's hard to know every single detail of a contract or how it works and what goes on behind the scenes..I cant say Dana is always right and the fighters are always wrong or vice versa...As long as the UFC puts out quality cards every month im happy.

It becomes a problem when opponents of MMA use bad press from contract disputes to discredit MMA as a whole. for better or for worse, right now, the UFC is the window from which many people see MMA as a whole.

Quite a few are talking about it acctually. I personally think this is BS, in sports with unions the team has to pay the player if they cut them.

A perfect example is the NHL...

In the NHL, if a player gets injured during a game or practice, the team pays them for games missed.

If a player is not playing to their potential, the get sent down, but still earn their contract rates. when a player is placed on waivers by a team, it allows other teams to claim that player and assume his contract. There is a provision called "right of recall" which allows that team who initially put the player on waivers to recall the player. If there is no right of recall and no team claims the player, the player is now able to be demoted to the farm system team of the parent team and paid the minor league salary.

If a player has a no trade clause in their contract, the team cannot just ignore that and trade them.

I am probably missing something, but these three points are pretty strong.

These are some things the UFC should take into consideration to make their contracts a little more fighter friendly.

I see what you're trying to say, but in your comparison the NHL is not contrasting the UFC. One individual team would be; and every single promotion under the sun would equate to be the NHL in your comparison.

And there is no unified panel of every single promotion who will EVER have contractual clauses hand in hand with every promotion in a one on one sport.

Good idea if feasible but not possible unless you are a business with multiple "teams", not "competing organizations" under different ownerships.

_______________________________________If I was 50 years younger I'd kick your ass!

Quite a few are talking about it acctually. I personally think this is BS, in sports with unions the team has to pay the player if they cut them.

A perfect example is the NHL...

In the NHL, if a player gets injured during a game or practice, the team pays them for games missed.

If a player is not playing to their potential, the get sent down, but still earn their contract rates. when a player is placed on waivers by a team, it allows other teams to claim that player and assume his contract. There is a provision called "right of recall" which allows that team who initially put the player on waivers to recall the player. If there is no right of recall and no team claims the player, the player is now able to be demoted to the farm system team of the parent team and paid the minor league salary.

If a player has a no trade clause in their contract, the team cannot just ignore that and trade them.

I am probably missing something, but these three points are pretty strong.

These are some things the UFC should take into consideration to make their contracts a little more fighter friendly.

I see what you're trying to say, but in your comparison the NHL is not contrasting the UFC. One individual team would be; and every single promotion under the sun would equate to be the NHL in your comparison.

And there is no unified panel of every single promotion who will EVER have contractual clauses hand in hand with every promotion in a one on one sport.

Good idea if feasible but not possible unless you are a business with multiple "teams", not "competing organizations" under different ownerships.

No you can't have every single promotion, but the sanctioning bodies, or a union of some kind should protect the fighters. Like the Muhammed Ali act in boxing, that should be put into place in MMA. There will be alot of articles written on this exact thread if Cro Cop was released, because business should be a two way street, and benifit both parties.

Quite a few are talking about it acctually. I personally think this is BS, in sports with unions the team has to pay the player if they cut them.

A perfect example is the NHL...

In the NHL, if a player gets injured during a game or practice, the team pays them for games missed.

If a player is not playing to their potential, the get sent down, but still earn their contract rates. when a player is placed on waivers by a team, it allows other teams to claim that player and assume his contract. There is a provision called "right of recall" which allows that team who initially put the player on waivers to recall the player. If there is no right of recall and no team claims the player, the player is now able to be demoted to the farm system team of the parent team and paid the minor league salary.

If a player has a no trade clause in their contract, the team cannot just ignore that and trade them.

I am probably missing something, but these three points are pretty strong.

These are some things the UFC should take into consideration to make their contracts a little more fighter friendly.

I see what you're trying to say, but in your comparison the NHL is not contrasting the UFC. One individual team would be; and every single promotion under the sun would equate to be the NHL in your comparison.

And there is no unified panel of every single promotion who will EVER have contractual clauses hand in hand with every promotion in a one on one sport.

Good idea if feasible but not possible unless you are a business with multiple "teams", not "competing organizations" under different ownerships.

No you can't have every single promotion, but the sanctioning bodies, or a union of some kind should protect the fighters. Like the Muhammed Ali act in boxing, that should be put into place in MMA. There will be alot of articles written on this exact thread if Cro Cop was released, because business should be a two way street, and benifit both parties.

The MMA business model is nothing like a Boxing business model and is in fact closer to a team sport model as far as fighters in relations to promotions, sanctioning bodies, etc.

I do agree that fighters should be protected better, possibly requiring the promotion to assign a lawyer to go over specifics of a contract to make sure the fighter fully understands, and no language in the contract is a abusive to a fighters rights.

But to have an MMA Reform Act that even halfway resembles the Muhammad Ali Reform Act would be asinine. Even though they are both one on one sports, it is Apples and Oranges.

_______________________________________If I was 50 years younger I'd kick your ass!

While I am not against the idea of a fighter union, and believe it would benefit the fighters a lot, that isn't what this issue is about to me. Cro-cop signed a contract with clauses that allow him to make a certain amount of money depending on how he does. I am sure he thought he would be doing better, and I also thought he would be UFC champ by now, but he hasn't done so well in the UFC so far. Standard UFc deals are written that your pay keeps going up when you win, and stays the same if you don't win. Now this is where a fighter union would be helpful. As there would be a lot more guarantees in the fighters favor if there was one. The UFC always has paid very well for guys who are successful, and often give bonuses not negotiated for fighters who are successful or exciting. Personally I am against complete guaranteed contracts in any sport. In baseball and basketball players often have great contract years, get paid huge guaranteed deals , and then don't do near as well again. Football has the best system IMO, as their is a significant portion of money guaranteed in the deal, and the rest is based on performance. That way seems fairest to me for both sides. If a player continues to produce, the team will keep the contract going. If he doesn't ,they cut him ,or ask him to take a pay cut. Also, if the team has money problems and cuts a productive player, like Carolina just did with Wahle, the player will get another big deal somewhere else. This is similar to the UFC's deals, but the fighters have much less guaranteed. Thats something I would like to see remedied. Either way the UFC is not violating their side of the contract , and Cro-cop did not have to sign it. Fedor didn't, and we will see how that plays out over time. Personally I think if the UFC cuts Cro-cop, and he still fights in MMA anywhere , they are making a mistake. This would only help their competitors IMO, and diehards like us will still will pay to see him fight in MMA . If enough diehards invite enough casual fans over to watch his fights, and he has some more great fights, it would help whichever org. he fights for get a foothold in North America. In Japan I would bet my right arm they could sell out some huge arenas for a Fedor/Mirko 2 headlined card,and enough of us would buy that PPV to get the ball rolling for that companys exposure here. . If on the other hand, the UFC releases him contingent on him only fighting by K-1 rules , I doubt they will suffer much for it. K-1 has never gained a big foothold here. The people who would be bummed are people like me, who still think Cro-cop could return to form and make a run at the UFC title. So to sum it up, the UFC still is honoring their side of the contract either way, but I would prefer if fighters had more leverage in negotiations.

Last edited 2/13/08 4:04AM server time by hippysmackerEdit note/reason: n/a

_______________________________________“Never violate a woman, nor harm a child. Do not lie ,cheat ,or steal.for selfish gain. These things are for lesser men. Protect the weak against the evil strong. And never allow thoughts of gain to lead you into the pursuit of evil. Never back away from an enemy. Either fight or surrender. It is not enough to say I will not be evil. Evil must be fought wherever it is found.”The Iron Code

It is not a double standard it is write in the contract that fighters and NFL players and Basketball players and F-1 drivers etc.. are signing all the time man !!

It is specify that the company can at any time put an end to their contract with a guy and release him from his obligation.

A contract is a contract. both parties can pull out, whether the employee is making $5.15 an hour or $500,000 a fight. I've signed a contract with my employer, I'm contracted to work for them, but if they want to fire me, or I want to leave, 2 weeks notice is all it takes.

Either way, Cro Cop possibly going to K-1 is the best news I've had in ages.

It is not a double standard it is write in the contract that fighters and NFL players and Basketball players and F-1 drivers etc.. are signing all the time man !!

It is specify that the company can at any time put an end to their contract with a guy and release him from his obligation.

A contract is a contract. both parties can pull out, whether the employee is making $5.15 an hour or $500,000 a fight. I've signed a contract with my employer, I'm contracted to work for them, but if they want to fire me, or I want to leave, 2 weeks notice is all it takes.

Either way, Cro Cop possibly going to K-1 is the best news I've had in ages.

Quite a few are talking about it acctually. I personally think this is BS, in sports with unions the team has to pay the player if they cut them.

A perfect example is the NHL...

In the NHL, if a player gets injured during a game or practice, the team pays them for games missed.

If a player is not playing to their potential, the get sent down, but still earn their contract rates. when a player is placed on waivers by a team, it allows other teams to claim that player and assume his contract. There is a provision called "right of recall" which allows that team who initially put the player on waivers to recall the player. If there is no right of recall and no team claims the player, the player is now able to be demoted to the farm system team of the parent team and paid the minor league salary.

If a player has a no trade clause in their contract, the team cannot just ignore that and trade them.

I am probably missing something, but these three points are pretty strong.

These are some things the UFC should take into consideration to make their contracts a little more fighter friendly.

Thats not really true. NHL had a lot of changes since it almost went under a few years ago. Just like baseball and many other sports if a player is sent to the minors he takes a huge pay cut. You really think a team is going to keep paying a player millions to play in Podunk. If you think so your crazy. It just bad business. The teams pay the players millions to put butts in the stands and get people to watch on TV. They do that by helping their team win. If your not doing that then your not worth the money they are paying you. Its not the UFC job to make their contracts fighter friendly. Most of the stuff in their contracts are there to protect them. Its the fighters and their managers job to negotiate the contract the way the want it. You cant expect the UFC to not do whats in their best interest.

I don't think the UFC should be taking these steps at this time with CC because I think he could a make a come back. I also think he is a bad choice to cut as the HW division needs all the depth it can get. Not as much as the MW division but still needs all the fighters they have (maybe I feel that way because the other weight classes are so stacked). But I really don't understand why people are up in arms about it and saying it double standards. Its not at all, almost all sports contracts are setup this way. The team or owner may cut you at any time for any reason. They may also bench you at any time for any reason. They may also end the contract at any time for any reason. This isn't just sports either this holds true to work contracts as well. People need to understand the UFC is a company thats primary goal is to make money. I'm not going to blame them for protecting themselves in their contracts. I would do the same damn thing. If CC is unhappy with it he only has himself to blame. His mangers and him negotiated his contract with the UFC and also he should have been better prepared for his fights in the UFC. Come on guys he didn't even train in a cage or prepare himself for elbows till he got left high kicked KOed. His very next fight he got beat again and looked out of place in the cage still. That was due to his lack of training in a cage. If he would have been training from the start in the cage and training elbows we wont even be having this talk.

Last edited 2/13/08 5:03AM server time by telnightsEdit note/reason: n/a

...His very next fight he got beat again and looked out of place in the cage still. That was due to his lack of training in a cage...

Well actually he was clearly winning the first round until he broke his rib late in the first, and it went downhill from there.It wasnt the lack of Cage experience that cost him the fight, it was an injury caused by himself.Thought i'd just point that out for you

I have a question though... Has anyone ever won a fight after breaking a rib mid-match?

...His very next fight he got beat again and looked out of place in the cage still. That was due to his lack of training in a cage...

Well actually he was clearly winning the first round until he broke his rib late in the first, and it went downhill from there.It wasnt the lack of Cage experience that cost him the fight, it was an injury caused by himself.Thought i'd just point that out for you

I have a question though... Has anyone ever won a fight after breaking a rib mid-match?

I mostly agree with the rest of Telnights post as well, but am glad someone brought up Cro-cops rib injury. No matter how he got hurt( he claims he did it throwing a high kick and I don't remember Kongo landing a hard rib shot at the end of the 1rst , so it makes sense) he was stalking and clearly beating Kongo before that happened. yes, he did ultimately lose, but this is one of the reasons I think the UFC would be making a mistake if they let him go anywhere he can still fight MMA. He looked fierce in the beginning of that fight, and I really beleive he could return to form.

_______________________________________“Never violate a woman, nor harm a child. Do not lie ,cheat ,or steal.for selfish gain. These things are for lesser men. Protect the weak against the evil strong. And never allow thoughts of gain to lead you into the pursuit of evil. Never back away from an enemy. Either fight or surrender. It is not enough to say I will not be evil. Evil must be fought wherever it is found.”The Iron Code

Thats not really true. NHL had a lot of changes since it almost went under a few years ago. Just like baseball and many other sports if a player is sent to the minors he takes a huge pay cut. You really think a team is going to keep paying a player millions to play in Podunk. If you think so your crazy. It just bad business. The teams pay the players millions to put butts in the stands and get people to watch on TV. They do that by helping their team win. If your not doing that then your not worth the money they are paying you. Its not the UFC job to make their contracts fighter friendly. Most of the stuff in their contracts are there to protect them. Its the fighters and their managers job to negotiate the contract the way the want it. You cant expect the UFC to not do whats in their best interest.

Actually it is true and it is more apparent now that the new CBA is in effect. By sending a player down to the minors, his salary does not count toward the team's salary cap. This allows wealthier teams to put better players on stand-by in case other ones get hurt or pick up temporary players (better ones) in trades even though they are at their cap limit.

I would argue that most of the stuff in players' contracts are not to protect the team. They are put in there as a result of negotiating terms. Kpro made some good points above, but the bottom line is, the UFC can dish out one sided contracts because there aren't enough high paying options for the fighters to use as bargaining chips.

Understanding that the UFC is doing all they can to make money is all fair, but it's a little short sided when the results of handling their contracts can be bad publicity for the organization or the sport in the long haul.

The Cro Cop situation is a perfect example that supports what I said about how the UFC deals with injuries to their fighters. He got injured during his fight. Whether it was from throwing a kick or getting hit, it doesn' t matter. He also got hit in the groin several times. To me, blaming a guy's poor performance without taking that into consideration and then wanting to throw his contract out the window is just spitting on him when he's down.

You guys seem to know more about contracts than i do, so I have to ask about an example that I thought was comparative and interesting...

Bobby Petrino...

The guy walks out on a 10 year contract after the first or second year in Louisville only to take the job as head coach of the Atlanta Falcons...

He signs a 5 year 20some million dollar contract, and then walks out in the middle of his first season to go coach back in the college ranks (arkansas)...

I mean, not only is this guy going to have problems with players and managment trusting him, and he has definitley had his reputation ruined in certain circles but...

How the hell does he get away with this stuff... I think he had to pay 1 mil back to Louisville... But it seems like he's breaching contracts left and right, but doesn't get put through the ringer like some other people do?

If i'm correct, Cro cop still has a coulple of fights left on his ufc contract and yet they let him just leave becuase they don't think that he's worth what he was originally signed for and they want to re-do his contract. Yet Dana taking Randy to court. WTF???